Francis Thompson - a closer look

[Lewis C]

I would think it unlikely that Jack the Ripper, whose victims were mostly in their 40's, was a pedophile.

[Richard Patterson]

Hi all


So there's a fair amount of discussion ongoing regarding Francis Thompson, and seemingly some very different views and beliefs concerning his life.

But what do we really know of him?

Is our level of understanding accurate?

And how does that impact on his candidacy as a potential Ripper suspect?

Is it possible to separate the facts from the fiction?

Well, let's try at least.

But where to begin?...


Okay, let's start with an interesting article I found regarding the life of Francis Thompson. It's a nice article that attempts to shine a light on his personality. It's an angle that I haven't personally read about before and because of that, I wanted to share it here...



I particularly like the comment...


"Children were everything to him."


I think this article paints a rather interesting picture of Francis Thompson.


Thoughts?

Rookie, that old clipping is precisely the sort of romanticized gloss that has helped shield Thompson for more than a century. The reality is far darker. Far from being adored by children, Thompson was actively avoided by them. Alice Meynell, who took him into her household, admitted she and Wilfrid kept their daughters away from him at first, and biographer testimony makes it clear the children themselves “despised” his presence.

The real record shows Thompson’s fixation was not one of healthy affection but of disturbing attraction. His letters and poems openly admitted to desiring girls barely past puberty, and after his death marionettes were found restrung with the hair of the Meynell daughters—an unsettling detail that even his admirers could not explain away. In his correspondence he repeatedly couched his fascination with young girls in religious or mythic language, but the underlying obsession is unmistakable.

So when you quote, “Children were everything to him,” that line is tragically true—but not in the sentimental way the newspaper intended. They were an object of fixation. The Meynells recognized this and grew cold toward him because of it. That gulf between the sanitized public image and the private, disturbing reality is precisely why Thompson has to be examined critically as a suspect rather than left swaddled in Victorian myth.

[The Rookie Detective]

Thanks for sharing this interesting article. It was in 1997 that I first connected Francis Thompson’s name with the Ripper murders so yes, interest in Thompson, the forgotten poet, was definitely renewed.

Richard, if you liked that article, you're going to love this one...

Here's the photographs taken from the actual play referred to in the article above.

It's from March 1933.



It's set between 1885 to 1888.

Ernest Milton; the actor who played Thompson, went on to be a famous classical Shakespearen actor.

I particularly like the character list...

Francis Thompson
Ann
Saul Right
Mr Oldcastle
A Prostitute.



It's an interesting take on the narrative of Thompson.


Those photos speak a thousand words.

[Richard Patterson]

This article appeared in the Stage newspaper back November 1997.

Interesting...

Thanks for sharing this interesting article. It was in 1997 that I first connected Francis Thompson’s name with the Ripper murders so yes, interest in Thompson, the forgotten poet, was definitely renewed.

[The Rookie Detective]

This article appeared in the Stage newspaper back November 1997.

Interesting...

[Richard Patterson]

Hi Lewis,

Dissection of cadavers would have been part of a medical course and, as in most things, those interested in dissection might have been expected to exceed the basic requirement while those interested in other areas, such as general practice, might be expected to do only the minimum dissections required to complete their qualifications. I think that a father paying for additional cadavers might indicate the former.

Cheers, George

George, thanks for weighing in — I agree entirely that cadaver work was compulsory at Owens. But that’s precisely why Thompson’s case stands out.

His sister wasn’t remarking on the fact he dissected (which every medical student did), but on the volume — “many a time he asked my father for £3 or £4 for dissecting fees; so often that my father remarked what a number of corpses he was cutting up.” This isn’t the language of meeting a minimum requirement; it’s the language of someone whose hours in the mortuary were conspicuously long and repeated enough that the family complained of the cost.

Bridget Boardman, in Between Heaven and Charing Cross, confirms Owens had a very strict attendance system: students couldn’t slip away to libraries, and Dreschfeld enforced daily practicals. Thompson did six years of that, including anatomy, surgery, and hospital work — not a few token dissections. Add to that his father’s constant paying-out for cadavers, and we’re looking at someone who clearly exceeded the average, not merely checked the boxes.

So yes, cadavers were mandatory. But Thompson’s family testimony shows he wasn’t just an average dissector. He was steeped in it, to a degree his relatives thought unusual. That scale is what makes the detail significant — especially when considering how it later maps onto his writing and the Whitechapel evidence.

[GBinOz]

I think that I recall Richard saying in another thread that working with cadavers was mandatory, so if that's true, Thompson would have had to do cadaver work whether he was interested in it or not.

Hi Lewis,

Dissection of cadavers would have been part of a medical course and, as in most things, those interested in dissection might have been expected to exceed the basic requirement while those interested in other areas, such as general practice, might be expected to do only the minimum dissections required to complete their qualifications. I think that a father paying for additional cadavers might indicate the former.

Cheers, George

[The Rookie Detective]

One of the better articles on Thompson IMO...



I like the fact it highlights that despite Thompson having been a rather transient individual, he also had particular areas he frequented; Kilburn, Maida Vale, Paddington and Westminster inparticular.

Not just about Whitechapel, as one might expect for a Ripper suspect.

[Lewis C]

Hi Lewis,

His father complained of the number of cadavers he had to pay for so I think that we can presume that he took an interest in the dissection aspect of his studies.

Cheers, George

I think that I recall Richard saying in another thread that working with cadavers was mandatory, so if that's true, Thompson would have had to do cadaver work whether he was interested in it or not.

[The Rookie Detective]

Some interesting alleged "facts" about Francis Thompson...

The issue is; which ones are actually true?

If any?...





He regularly wore a distinctive Brown Ulster coat, regardless of the season.

He was born in Winckley Street, Preston

He loved Cricket and often visited Old Trafford. (Lancashire)

He often carried an old satchel containing various manuscripts and books.

He owned several pipes

He did several odd jobs, including selling matches in Fleet Street, and "holding horses heads" to make money.

His father regarded him as a failure for not following in his footsteps as a Doctor, and after having spent "hundreds of pounds" finally chose to give up on his son.

As a child he had a toy doll, that he referred to in some of his poetry.

He often played traunt from the lecture rooms at Owen College

He was squeamish about blood and "fainted like a delicate girl at the first sight of flowing blood during his initial clinic."

As a youth, he spent most of his time at school reading in the library and had a fascination with classic English literature.

Throughout his life he moved lodgings many many times.

He was referred to as "A homeless wanderer of the Thames Embankment."

He had a distinctive laugh.

He was referred to as having "A shy and illusive personality"

He had a distinct "slight" frame and often walked rather hurriedly.

He didn't have a good relationship with his step mother, who was once was referred to as "Tyrannical" and "unsympathetic."

He sometimes sheltered under the arches of Charing Cross.

He sometimes slept on the "rubbish heaps in Covent Garden."

When he died, in his possession was a "box of rubbish" consisting of broken pipes, broken pens, and a lamp without a wick.

He left over a hundred notebooks full of his writings and poems to Wilfred Meynell.

He often frequented the Skiddaw pub in Maida Vale, which stood at the junction of Chippenham Road and Elgin Avenue.

He adored children.

He was a Catholic

He lived in Storrington in 1889

He lived in Wales

He attended the Capuchin Monastery in Pentasaph, North Wales.

He lived in West London

When he prayed in his lodgings, his landlady stated that he prayed so loudly, that is sounded "as if he were preaching."

He attended the "Church of our lady of Lourdes" on Harrow Road, City of Westminster. (Close to the Grand Union Canal)
He also attended other churches including "St Mary of the Angels" and the "Church of the Sacred Heart."

Some addresses in West London included...

Fernhead Road, West Kilburn, West London
16 Elgin Avenue, Maida Vale, West London
128 Brondesbury Road, North Maida Vale, West London (yards from the trainline)

He died in London from Consumption and was buried in St Mary's Catholic cemetery in Kensal Green.



It would be interesting to see which of the above are indeed accurate and true, and which are not.


Fascinating character indeed

[Richard Patterson]

Hi Lewis,

His father complained of the number of cadavers he had to pay for so I think that we can presume that he took an interest in the dissection aspect of his studies.

Cheers, George

George, I think you’re spot on about Thompson’s involvement in the dissection side of his training. His father’s complaints about the cost of cadavers really drive the point home — and the record shows he wasn’t just dabbling in poetry while enrolled at Owens.

Boardman’s Between Heaven & Charing Cross (1988) makes it very clear: from 1878 to 1883 Thompson spent six solid years at Owens College, where practical anatomy was the core of the curriculum. Students were deliberately discouraged from spending time in the library; attendance was compulsory, and Dreschfeld — Thompson’s own pathology lecturer — was notorious for refusing to lecture if a single student was absent. The college calendars and registers list Thompson as present term after term.

That means he would have had daily exposure to cadaver work and to the “Virchow technique” of organ removal that Dreschfeld had just brought back from Germany. In fact, Owens was the first place in England to adopt it. Far from being a dreamer who avoided medical study, Thompson trained hands-on in cutting-edge pathology and surgery.

So yes — the idea that Thompson shirked his medical studies for cricket or books doesn’t fit the evidence. He may have hated blood and broken under the strain eventually, but for six years he was a committed medical student immersed in dissection, organ removal, and clinical practice.

[GBinOz]

Hi George,

Or depending on your source, someone who took no interest in his medical studies, presumably meaning any aspect of them, but rather was interested in poetry, essay writing, and watching cricket matches.

Hi Lewis,

His father complained of the number of cadavers he had to pay for so I think that we can presume that he took an interest in the dissection aspect of his studies.

Cheers, George

[Lewis C]

Then spending 6 years training as a surgeon but being interested in dissection more than sitting exams.

Hi George,

Or depending on your source, someone who took no interest in his medical studies, presumably meaning any aspect of them, but rather was interested in poetry, essay writing, and watching cricket matches.

[Doctored Whatsit]

I quite agree Doc. But what is being quoted is not a police report. It is a journalist giving a eulogy to a recently departed, so some latitude needs to be accorded.

Cheers, George

I don't see it as a eulogy, as it claims to be a police report, but has not the slightest resemblance to one, nor are any alleged facts quoted relevant to any part of the Ripper story.

[GBinOz]

All police reports must clearly state dates, times addresses and police officers' names etc, but this report totally avoids all necessary detail, "a certain alley" etc. White never had to attend an inquest, despite his involvement. It is impossible to identify which murder is allegedly being described from the information, because none of them accurately correspond to the information provided. He refers to the weather being "bitterly cold", but none of the murders occurred in winter. There are weird verb tenses involved suggesting that the piece was written not at the time, as it should have been, but much later, such as "had been watching" when "have been watching" would have been appropriate, then mysteriously inappropriate comments like "rubber shoes, which were rather rare in those days." That couldn't have been part of his report at the time. He said it was "bitter cold", but none of the murders took place in winter.

I quite agree Doc. But what is being quoted is not a police report. It is a journalist giving a eulogy to a recently departed, so some latitude needs to be accorded.

Cheers, George